Yes, that was not my intention at all. I had two points which I don't think I explicated very well.
1. The Tea Party isn't really an established group or coherent ideology. This has the benefit and detriment of making it difficult to talk about the group as a whole. If you are a Democrat and the leaders of the party are doing stupid things with which you disagree, you can opt out of the party, change your voter registration affiliation to independent or something else. The Tea Party, per se, isn't a party so you can't really do that. There are a bunch of disparate groups that kind of work with one another and who all use some variation of the name Tea Party. 2. The hard part is that a lot of the people in the movement say "I'm the Tea Party". I mentioned Mike Williams. He heads one of the most influential Tea Party groups. He is pretty obviously a racist asshole. When you have a group leader, that leader speaks for your group. When that leader continues to make these sorts of statements and stays in a leadership position, I think it is fair to label the group based on the actions of its leader. If you strongly disagree with having a racist leader, you can certainly leave. The point of having a group with a leader and a membership is to have the leader speak for the membership. So I'd say that I agree with you that you can't label "The Tea Party" as racist based on the actions of a few members. On the other hand, there is no such thing as The Tea Party. It isn't an organized group. However, there are a number of somewhat organized groups that claim to represent The Tea Party and at least one of the most prominent and who actively promotes itself nationwide definitely has a leader who makes very racist statements. Hopefully that's a bit more clear. Cheers, Judah On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: > > I know you most likely did not intend it this way, but it seems as if > you are saying that as long as a group is not an 'organized entity' > its OK to stereotype and label members of that group based on the > words and actions of a few in the same group? > > If someone identifies themselves with a group of people, does it > really matter if that group is an 'organized entity' (I wonder what > criteria need to be met to be considered an 'organized entity')? > Labeling one person of a group based on the words and actions of > others in the same group is just does not seem like your style. > > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Judah McAuley <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The problem with that, Scott, is that there isn't a Tea Party as an >> organized entity. Most of the time when a leader of some Tea Party >> sort of group goes off the deep end, a bunch of people run in and say >> "well, they aren't the *real* Tea Party". The Tea Party Express, for >> instance, does a lot of organizing and money donations (like the money >> they just put into the Alaska Republican Primary in support of Palin's >> favored candidate). They would seem to be fairly "main stream" Tea >> Party. Yet the head of the Tea Party Express, Mike Williams, called >> Obama an "Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug" and the Manhattan >> Boro President a "Jewish Uncle Tom". After he wrote a rambling, racist >> letter from "the Colored People" to President Lincoln praising >> slavery, the National Tea Party Federation kicked out the Tea Party >> Express group because they wouldn't fire Williams. Of course Williams >> dismisses the National Tea Party Federation as a "fringe group" and >> they go on their merry way involving themselves in political races >> across the country. >> >> Judah >> >> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Scott Stroz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> To be fair, there may be individual members of the Tea party who have >>> expressed these opinions. I think you will agree, its a bit unfair to >>> judge the entire Tea Party on the words and actions of a few of their >>> members. >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Vivec <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> They threaten violence, they threaten to overthrow the government to take >>>> back 'their' country and say that under the constitution they have that >>>> right; they traffic in racism; >>>> they called the President of the United States a Communist; they attack >>>> homosexuals...you need me to go on? >>>> >>>> I'm also trying hard not to comment on what might be a Freudian slip on >>>> your >>>> part below. heh heh. >>>> >>>> On 25 August 2010 12:21, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> We are they extremists? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:325893 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
